|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 941
Points: 2,924
|
In Matthew 10:39 Jesus is recorded as saying, "He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
From the resources at my disposal I know that various biblical scholars teach regarding the wisdom of this statement, and how its truth is manifest, but I would be interested to know how this statement sits with others on the forum.
Also, is the spiritual landscape of this forum developing wisely or foolishly?
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Dreamy wrote:In Matthew 10:39 Jesus is recorded as saying, "He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
From the resources at my disposal I know that various biblical scholars teach regarding the wisdom of this statement, and how its truth is manifest, but I would be interested to know how this statement sits with others on the forum.
Also, is the spiritual landscape of this forum developing wisely or foolishly?
You love throwing a bone to us dogs, Dreamy .... I'd be interested to read what "biblical scholars" have said on this as I have not (systematically) studied the bible in any setting where in-errancy was the ethos, so I can't tackle it from any informed or literalist angle. So, how to answer? I suppose looking at it, just as a sentence of english: "He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it." is there an implied "for my sake", or equivalent after the first clause? ie. is it right to read it as: "He that finds his life shall lose it (for my sake): and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it." Which suggests that someone who has found a (worldly) direction in life and then follows Jesus has got to be prepared to give all that up for greater things. Then the second clause is just repeating the same message - which "double phrasing" is, I seem to remember, a very common trick of language in rabbinical teachings, used to emphasise a point.
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 12/28/2009
Posts: 2,466
Points: 7,414
Location: the city by the bay
|
To those who wish to converse about their god I suppose it is can be seen as wise. It is only a story, that if you choose to believe, can and may help you, and I mean the general 'you,' with your life on this earth and possibly the dream of an afterlife.
I myself have been watching certain threads for a while now and they, to me, just seem to be a one-upsmanship as to who can correct whom and who knows more and has more books than so and so. I see it as an 'ego gone wild' in some instances. Who is a Christian and who isn't and why they don't fall in this select group. But this is only my opinion.
But to some it is a burden placed upon them whilst still in the womb and they have had to carry this with them. They carry it but they don't understand it. They follow because that is all they know to do and to question is seen to be wrong. Are they happy? Who knows, but sometimes ignorance is bliss and it is easier to follow than question.
Yes, yes, I know there are scriptures that can be quoted to prove a point but it doesn't make it true.
It is just the story for this two thousand year period. There were gods before, during, and after this Jew was born. And they will be another group of gods after this period is over. It is the way of man.
Dreamy, if I 'find my life' and I am comfortable in my life and I work hard to do no harm to others, and I take care of mother earth and all that includes then I don't loose my life. I am working within the circle as that is what life is. The circle of life. I have taken care of things in a way so mother earth will be here for seven generations or more.
If I die like the martyrs in the first century or like those now in Libya and others around the world that are choosing to die for their god they are not helping their families or anyone. They are just dying.
The above in linear thinking. god, man, animals, and everything below that. But that isn't how the bible says god created this earth. The heavens and the seas and all animal and plant life was here before man. Man is the caretaker of earth and that is what he should be working for now whilst he or she is living. Live your life and good will follow. To think only of this place called 'heaven' and how to ge there without including mother earth is selfish, truly selfish.
But that is how most of the Christians of today think. They really are living the Roman way of eat, drink and be merry----look out for number one, take care of yourself so you will go to heaven. They are so busy reading the scriptures and living them by rote that they really aren't living at all. But again this is only my opinion.
(If) this man Jesus died for our sins then that should be the end. Period. That is it case closed. It is others who came after him that had to keep him alive and put forth a cause n order to fulfill something else written again by men and handed down hundreds of years before.
No one really knows what happened the first three hundred years. The Jews who followed him were trying to work things out between themselves as there were many splinter groups so who really knows what happened???? It is a word of mouth story that was finally written down and translated from language to language.
All this biblical stuff and by that I mean the KJV and/or those written before were edited by men. It isn't complete. There is so much missing and worse then that there was so much that wasn't allowed to be put in these books as it upset the story these men wanted to tell. It isn't a fair path, true path or righteous one. As there are more pieces and scriptures buried and found in caves. The KJV is just a piece of the story but not a true story.
Man sacrificed animals to their gods for repentence and favours and to give thanks. Jesus was the ultimate animal to be sacrificed. Now when it is put that way it is actually, to me, a really creepy story or myth.
"Lose your life for his sake" if you wish, but it is at best a second hand or third had story, which has been rewritten to suit an agenda that you are loosing your life for. But again, this is only my opinion.
Each to their own. I shall follow the circle of life.
peace out, >^,,^< back to >>>>>  
The poor object to being governed badly, whilst the rich object to being governed at all. G.K. Chesterton
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,005
Points: 1,912
Location: United Kingdom
|
I think that verse is straight forward. Whoever preserves his life by being unfaithful, that is lacking integrity, will in fact lose it. But whoever stands fast and as a consequence dies because of his integrity, will save his life, which ultimately is in the hands of God and not men.
Verse 28 of the same chapter makes this clear:Matthew 10:28
Common English Bible (CEB)
28 Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body but can’t kill the soul. Instead, be afraid of the one who can destroy both body and soul in hell. Soul here is from the Greek word Psy.khe which simply means 'life.'
So although a man may take your life he cannot take away your prospects of life, which lie with God. Paul told Christians to 'get a hold on the real life' by seeking God's favour and fearing him rather than man.
PS: The word hell used here is from the Greek Gehenna which in bible terms signifies the second death, from which there is no return, as apposed to Adamic Death from which one can get a resurrection.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 5/27/2011
Posts: 5,383
Points: 15,919
Location: Germany
|
Thank you, Kitten. You're expressing my thoughts much better than I could. And Dreamy, re your question concerning the ' spiritual landscape'  of this forum, I can reply with a loud and clear ' YES, I sincerely hope so'.
"Before I speak, I have something important to say."Groucho Marx
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2009
Posts: 1,461
Points: 4,240
Location: United States
|
What is the "problem" with this forum... what exactly?
It is "Philosophy and Religion"?-- no?
I've been away for a long time and return to read provocative, intelligent&informed, and well-writtten
posts by Epi, intelfam, Dreamy, RuthP, Romany... many more.
Opinions are stated, debated and often one asks for clarification, extra info, etc.
There is the occasional off-base post or comment, but a lot less sarcasm and anger and insults than
a couple of years ago.
What is the problem, really, please tell me.
Dreamy's original post here (this thread) appears completely appropriate.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 1,105
Points: 3,057
Location: Japan
|
RubyMoon wrote:
What is the problem, really, please tell me.
I don't see any problem.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 2,444
Points: 7,186
Location: China
|
Dreamy,
re your question regarding the "spiritual landscape" of this Forum. By using the words "this Forum" and not "this categorical section of this Forum" I read your query to be concerned with the broader view?
While we don't see you active in many of the topics, I am assumming that you do, however, read them. You will remember, therefore, that, originally, the category Philosophy and Religion, was not included. This was purely a language forum - and from the very first it has been used not only to discuss and debate English, but to help, guide and inspire.
I, at least, think it continues to do so. To find an answer to your query, I think one has only to read the lengthy and painstaking posts of people like Ruth, Thar and so many others, to see that they are staying true to the spirit of helping, advising and giving generously of their time - for no personal gain.
It's an open forum so, from time to time, we do get rabble rousers using it to further personal agendas. Like Ruby, I also left for a long time when it seemed that this was becoming almost a one-or-two-man show. That personal recriminations and opportunities to showcase what was percieved by some peoples as thier own 'talent' made it, indeed a "foolish" place.
Now the number of topics has been increased from strictly Language matters, the trouble-makers excised - or at least tamped down to an extent that they no longer exert a disruptive force, and the Forum itself expanded. There may be a little snarling and snapping from time to time regarding Religion and Politics but those are two highly incendiary topics, and if you compare the way they are conducted here to other forums, it is my opinion that we are doing well.
This site started as a Language forum - its spiritual quality was never stressed. Yet the very fact that, from the first, and through all the teething troubles, many people continued to care for others' feeling, to advise, to go to great lengths to help, to laugh a lot and share fun and humour.....I'd say pointed to the fact that, regardless of religiosity, the spiritual health of the forum per se, was doing quite nicely.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,005
Points: 1,912
Location: United Kingdom
|
As to the 'spiritual landscape' Dreamy, I guess that depends on ones personal views on religion or otherwise.
Looking back over past contributions one can only regret the loss some great posters. Talented and thoughtful people have left … people of all persuasions and views. In all honesty I cannot agree with Romany’s post and congratulatory pat on the back that the forum has improved. It seems to me there is a noticeable lack of thoughtful new posts in the Knowledge and Culture section, for example, and while it may have focused overmuch on the ‘personal’ recriminations side at one time, it was nonetheless full of vigour and humour.
Personally I miss many who have left the forum, and would rather have vigorous debate than bland ‘treading on coals’ comments. One can be too polite and we should not be fearful of disagreeing for thereby we learn.
To keep a balance we also, in my opinion, have some great new posters from whom I enjoy learning.
As with any group of faceless people one has to use discernment. I notice one or two who are inconsistent and who and have slipped up in ‘revealing’ their personal circumstances and situations and who like to elevate themselves by downing others and dropping names to curry favour. But one can just ignore such and take them with a pinch of salt.
As to posters offering examples of their work, well what is so bad about that? It is good to be charitable and not see bad around every corner or be enveloped by envy. I enjoy it when I see others post their poetry, for example, and read with interest. I sometimes do that myself, and will continue to do so, with no ulterior motive other than to share… that is what poets do. After all it is good to share is it not? In defiance of those who see otherwise I hereby post one of my poems aptly entitled 'Changing Landscapes.'
CHANGING LANDSCAPES
The trees in the wind sway upon the hill, singing the tunes of young manhood still
The stile, as if a sculpture yet holds its ground, the river below repeats its sound
The lane wends its way along the same path; the gravestone sports its epitaph
The house by the quarry looks as it did, with the upstairs windows by Ivy hid.
All is the same or so it appears, yet something is missing from my happy years
People are gone who graced this scape, the folk who lived here and gave it shape
They are the ones who gave life to this place, and held me then in a warm embrace
The roadman who walked his well-trodden way, has now succumbed to the call of clay
His tools in the shed corner have had their say, and his vocation belongs to another day
The Roadman, the Butcher his wife and their shop, the tramp and his nemesis the local cop
The farmer the fat woman the widow and woodman, Mary Martin, Betty and dear old Stan
All lie in the still of a churchyard grave dead to the sounds from the building’s nave
A layer of landscape has now passed along with me alone left to sing its song
Soon the sun will set on my day, yet the river continue to flow on its way
I do not see the past as teething troubles or through jaundiced eyes, but as a rich vein of challenging and informative posting and debate. I salute past posters and wish some of them would return.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 12/28/2009
Posts: 2,466
Points: 7,414
Location: the city by the bay
|
IMc, thank you. 
Romany, thank you as well-----you said it much better than I with respects to the forum. There are people whom I miss as well and there are also people who do not feel comfortable posting on certain threads even though they read them and that is a shame because when they do post they have much to add and are delightful.
peace out, >^,,^<
The poor object to being governed badly, whilst the rich object to being governed at all. G.K. Chesterton
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 2,370
Points: 7,185
Location: New Hampshire, United States
|
I wasn't aware that there was a spiritual landscape developing one way or the other. Although I must admit that I have no idea what that is, try as I might I can't seem to come up with even the first anchor, of a conceptual formation to fit that term. What is it?
Question authority, before it questions you. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,005
Points: 1,912
Location: United Kingdom
|
EPi you said: 'I wasn't aware that there was a spiritual landscape developing one way or the other'
Neither am I. Incidentally, I recall a rather lengthy and somewhat heated debate between you and me whereby we could not see eye to eye, and which I found a stimulating experience. On my part it leaves no resentment. I think I went over the top, I sometimes did that, but that is life and we are not enemies… I hope. I disagreed with Luftmarque on a few things, but agreed on most of what he said. I came to respect him. I found him a very honest and intelligent person who seemed to care about people. Good vigorous debate does not need to make enemies does it.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 2,370
Points: 7,185
Location: New Hampshire, United States
|
I agree it certainly does not, nor do I hold any ill will over it.
Question authority, before it questions you. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/10/2009
Posts: 1,252
Points: 3,693
|
To Intelfam:
I like response you gave in your post to Dreamy's question:
"is there an implied "for my sake", or equivalent after the first clause? ie. is it right to read it as:
"He that finds his life shall lose it (for my sake): and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
Which suggests that someone who has found a (worldly) direction in life and then follows Jesus has got to be prepared to give all that up for greater things. Then the second clause is just repeating the same message - which "double phrasing" is, I seem to remember, a very common trick of language in rabbinical teachings, used to emphasise a point."
I would like to add that whatever it is that one loves,one must devote one's life to its manifestation. It must become the focal point, a priority--thepriority in one's life that one is willing to sacrifice for . It may not totally eclipse all else from one's life, or perhaps totally annihilate one's being, but I think one must willingly surrender one's self to its devotion,funneling one's energies and focus, dedicating one's life to its attainment. One gives some thing up in order to have some thing of greater value. And so a part of one's self must be relinquished or "die" when one discovers what one truly wants in order to give meaning and purpose to one's life. One must "die" in order to be "born"-- or to find new life (purpose and meaning). But one can not let go or surrender--"die" until one has actually found (become) and embraced one's self in order to know-- "see" clearly what it is that one must do (needs/wants) and what "path" one must follow. Sometimes I think we walk down many paths before we discover the "right" path that is ours to take. I think ultimately the path that we must all take is one that leads to an affirmation of one's self.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Romany wrote:While we don't see you active in many of the topics, I am assumming that you do, however, read them. You will remember, therefore, that, originally, the category Philosophy and Religion, was not included. This was purely a language forum - and from the very first it has been used not only to discuss and debate English, but to help, guide and inspire.
I, at least, think it continues to do so. To find an answer to your query, I think one has only to read the lengthy and painstaking posts of people like Ruth, Thar and so many others, to see that they are staying true to the spirit of helping, advising and giving generously of their time - for no personal gain.
It's an open forum so, from time to time, we do get rabble rousers using it to further personal agendas.
Now the number of topics has been increased from strictly Language matters, the trouble-makers excised - or at least tamped down to an extent that they no longer exert a disruptive force, and the Forum itself expanded. There may be a little snarling and snapping from time to time regarding Religion and Politics but those are two highly incendiary topics, and if you compare the way they are conducted here to other forums, it is my opinion that we are doing well.
This site started as a Language forum - its spiritual quality was never stressed. I guess I got it wrong! I joined only a few months ago. I have little to contribute regarding the learning of english except sometimes to piggy-back on more able teachers or just saying "this is how she is spoke where I come from." I joined to further my own agenda not realising, mea culpa, that this was a an english language forum. I joined because I noticed some debates on topics which interested me. I am a cripple (lets avoid PC phrases) I can no longer meet people to discuss religion and philosophy, which interest me, although I havew no formal qualifications. I came, I suppose "to take", thinking about it. I was seeking a bit of intellectual and mental stimulation. That was my agenda. Can anybody point me in the right direction?
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,005
Points: 1,912
Location: United Kingdom
|
Just keep going Intel
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2009
Posts: 1,461
Points: 4,240
Location: United States
|
Intelfam... wow and whaaaa? Of course you are in the right forum/thread/post at the right time and place.
Pointed in the right direction? this is it!
No Doubts.
I was questioning the mood of the thread when i asked what was wrong?
I'll Clarify (maybe--hope)....
Dreamy's original topic was terrific i thought.
I didn't understand his question about the landscape of the forum/thread?
To me, it sounded like 'is this religion&phil. thread deteriorating or rising to a greater awareness/enlightened place, etc.
Then Kitten started with her first four lines or so (no criticism here, really) that sounded like the topic was "off" somehow and why were we insisting on views of god with one-ups-manships...
Imc agreed and said "YES" to Dreamy's "landscape" question.... "YES" which way?
So, i got confused. Sorry all.
To me the spiritual landscape is developing wisely--- how much more serious and into-it can religion/depression get?
Where is the foolishness?
I sincerely hope Dreamy&IMc can post here again and just clarify.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 2,444
Points: 7,186
Location: China
|
Yes, my thoughts were on a par with Ruby's. Although if Epi had posted his "I wasn't aware...." comment before mine I probably wouldn't have posted at all!
Intel, you snarky old bugger, what are you on about - not being 'qualified' and not 'helping'... and being 'umble?
What I was trying to point out (and, obviously, failing miserably) was:-
We're all qualified because we all share a common language. Not because we all share common set of spiritual goals or whatever.
We've all stumbled onto a site where people share thoughts and fears and ideas and knowledge and opinions and humour. Isn't that a sign something good is happening? Why parse and analyse it according to a particular set of values? It is.
I was also trying to point out that there was a time when things went a bit wobbly and there was bitterness and anger - and if Dreamy's question had been couched then I would more readily have understood. But the fact that this has once again become a good place to be speaks I think, for itself: - there's a lot of nice people here...isn't whatever one regards as the "Spiritual" health of such a positive venue obvious?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 5,711
Points: 17,072
Location: Canada
|
The Book seemed to be aware that a balance of both wise and foolish virgins is essential, and I think we're probably in range for that.
As to the statement in question I find it a little opaque, which is at odds with most of what I find in Jesus' reported teachings. The second part is clear enough, given that it addresses the life to come ( which would be the 'true' life ) rather than our transitory physical experience. I can only reason that the sense of the first part might be that without reference to the divine we can only discover the physical aspect of existence, eternal life being beyond this realm and therefore unattainable from it. You can't get there from here.
That being said, Jesus was a pragmatist, understanding that both the material and the spiritual are essential ( Render unto Caesar, the parable of the talents etc ).
I have my usual issue with translation : what The Book ' says ' is too often dependent on the agenda of the translating authority.
Sanity is not statistical
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
I apologise. I went off like a loose canon, due to personal issues.
I was just a bit gobsmacked. Dreamy posted what I thought was a reasonable post and suddenly we were all off in "the good old days" and it seemed at the time that Dreamy had somehow broken a secret rule unknown to all but the cognoscenti and "old timers". I could understand that those who have been around for a long time might feel a sense of ownership but I didn't want to be part of it all.
Let's get this straight. I think Dreamy is misguided in how he sees the world but I thought it was, as Romany stated, "an open forum" and that a "post was a post" and should be respected as such, either to be responded to as valid, or ignored if it was something disagreeable. If there is some etiquette on posting, let's have it out in the open.
That's where I was coming from and again I apologise for throwing a tantrum.
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
"Spiritual Landscape" Hmm, struggling like others. I get the idea of standing at a window and surveying the landscape. But I still can't get how it develops.
Maybe it means the breadth of spirituality? I assume Dreamy, you mean this particular heading of Philosophy and Religion. If so, I do miss the input of religions other then christianity. Maybe, as Romany has said, that is because this is under the umbrella of a forum for learning english and those who visit and are, for example, confucian in their outlook, are seeking to improve their language and aren't yet ready to articulate their viewpoint on philosophical issues. I struggle sometimes to get my head round some of the posts, english having so many shades of meaning.
As it is, we seem to have a voice for most standpoints, at least in the Western world. I find it stimulating and thoughtful and, if there is a creator who made the human mind, I bet he is looking down with a smile as we exercise and stretch those given faculties.
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/21/2009
Posts: 1,449
Points: 4,342
Location: Pakistan
|
"THOU SHALL INQUIRE, MAKE SEARCH, AND ASK DELEGENTLY." -deuteronomy 13: 13-15
This quatation is only to inspire my Christian friends here because I want to ask some questions in the coming lines.
My experience at the discussion forums particularly at such internation forums has been bitter and it came bitterer whenever I asked a question. The appearance even, of my poster has been "loaded" to someone of the posters those never met ever, with my mind before. Thanks to the profiling set of mind that many educated brains caught red handed.
As intelfam says the debates and discussions are to "stimulate" the space between the ears rather than they, the debates, are to cause high bloodpressure or exhosting anexthesea. For TDF, it has wonderful groups of people who have comfertable pigeon holes reseved for the similar class they possess. The TDF needs to grow toward a global diversity. Specially the English section should open their hands, minds and hearts to embrace the 'thoughts from Mars'. And people from other planets won't do it.
After all, English has become the mother toungue of the time.
What Dreamy's post made me think is that if some verses from bible could also be taken for suicide attakes as some Muslims are known for, in name of Jesus if not in name of dozzens of virgins? Where Deuteronomy is already known for its killer verses.
An other question with due respect; why religious people break God's defined rules and laws more often than those who are not obliged to obey any of devine ethos?
Obviously, no treety, no violation but why to sign an agreement if violation is often inavitable?
I'm a beleiver of my own kind and I know what I'm upto. Finally, I would thank to TDF for providing us a space to hear and to be heard.
*It's wonderful to know that all languages are Greek if not understood.*
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/21/2009
Posts: 1,449
Points: 4,342
Location: Pakistan
|
(I don't know what causes this empty entry)
*It's wonderful to know that all languages are Greek if not understood.*
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 2/13/2010
Posts: 3,098
Points: 9,315
Location: United States
|
"He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
I find this statement to be depressing in the extreme.
God gave us this life that we have. Should we not live it to the fullest? That we should lose it is beside the point. Are we to just give up because we are mortal?
I believe that it is the very height of blasphemy to NOT live this life we are given, even though we'll "loose" it.
I must be missing earlier passages. Something from context. It seems almost petulant. Why give life just to prove you have the power to take it?
I don't believe that Jesus ever said " he that loses his life for my sake shall find it". Those are word put into his mouth by Christians facing Roman pogroms. Stirring yes. Authentic. No.
"Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless, and do no wrong". (Knight's Oath, Kingdom of Heaven)
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
Dreamy wrote:In Matthew 10:39 Jesus is recorded as saying, "He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
From the resources at my disposal I know that various biblical scholars teach regarding the wisdom of this statement, and how its truth is manifest, but I would be interested to know how this statement sits with others on the forum.
Also, is the spiritual landscape of this forum developing wisely or foolishly? We must keep in mind the context here. Jesus is not speaking to the ordinary Christian, or even to the ordinary Christian evangelist. He is addressing 12 very special men (Apostles) who are about to set out on a very special mission. They are very special because Jesus has just made them so. He has empowered them to 'drive out demons, heal all kinds of sickness and even raise the dead'. This is an extension of his own powers. Their mission is special because they are to go 'to the lost sheep of Israel' - people who are not ignorant about God and their history and who faithfully attend the synagogue and who obey The Law. People who are ready and able to defend their lifestyle. The Twelve are to go urgently, and not to spend time and money equipping themselves with all sorts of extras for the mission or discussing 'What if?' scenarios. And Jesus issues a word of warning which I would suggest is just this - ' Don't be tempted to make a cushy number for yourself during this time (like some pre-WW1 Church of England Vicars), always calling on the friendly faces or sticking within your comfort zone, for if you do you will lose the life I have just created in you. But forget your own priorities for my sake and you will find a life worthy of my Name'. As to the development of the spiritual landscape of this forum, that depends upon the view of the reader/poster. I think it is at a crossroads, and could go either way.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
I am pondering the fact that some posters are seeing the quotation as implying that by committing to Jesus one may literally lose his life. OK, that may be an outcome (the issue of integrity has been well thrashed here). While it was a possibility, surely, like many other revered teachers, it just means that while your life may seem to be a success and you have many friends and lots of dosh, these are transient and like the Prodigal son, they can all slip away from you.
Isn't he just saying that you may/will see your lifestyle for what it is, superficial and unreliable? If you follow him, the rewards are permanent but this will require a change of direction (possibly) - or am I just assuming incorrectly that he might also mean "life" in the sense of "worldly possessions" or lifestyle?. Seen in that light, surely he is just repeating what many teachers about genuineness have said? Does it have to mean death?
Like HWNN1961 I assume that we are supposed (if there is a god) to grow to our full potential, not hide our light under a bushel usw, and I can imagine that a guy like JC might say "Yup, you've done well, but the tree has grown twisted, even though it's a big tree, and has quite a bit of fruit. Maybe if you hadn't planted it against this wall, it would have been, and can still be, a more magnificent specimen" - and all that that might imply?
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 941
Points: 2,924
|
Thankyou to everyone for your contributions. A number of questions have been raised so I should give some answers. Epiphileon wrote:I wasn't aware that there was a spiritual landscape developing one way or the other. Although I must admit that I have no idea what that is, try as I might I can't seem to come up with even the first anchor, of a conceptual formation to fit that term. What is it? I have used a metaphor to carry a meaning across. This is what metaphors are for. Physical landscapes have physical features, hills, plains, rivers, waterfalls, oceans, trees, sunlight, moonlight, starlight, shadows, buildings, roads etc. By inference we can describe non-physical aspects of reality in these terms. The Bible is full of metaphorical devices. Epiphileon:A physical landscape is a collection or view of physical features. A political landscape is a collection or view of political features. An economic landscape is a collection or view of economic features. An emotional landscape is a collection or view of emotional features, and a spiritual landscape is a collection or view of spiritual features. A spiritual landscape may be well ordered, like a market garden with neat weedfree rows of thoughts about the essence of life and its meaning, its philosophies and and its religions; or it may be a tangled jungle, a barren wasteland, a remote wilderness or a scorching desert, depending on the spirituality or otherwise of a person. Kitten: Yes, one-up-manship is part of the spiritual landscape. I have found that too much rivalry drives people away. It is not a very attractive quality but there are ways of dealing with it, like exercising self-control and patience. Romany: You are serving us well on TFD forum and helping to make it my forum of preference. You may have noticed I like to experiment with words, using them to structure ideas and provide shape and form to concepts. When I had more time I posted on other sections of the forum.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 941
Points: 2,924
|
HWNN1961 wrote:"He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it."
I find this statement to be depressing in the extreme.
God gave us this life that we have. Should we not live it to the fullest? That we should lose it is beside the point. Are we to just give up because we are mortal?
I believe that it is the very height of blasphemy to NOT live this life we are given, even though we'll "loose" it.
I must be missing earlier passages. Something from context. It seems almost petulant. Why give life just to prove you have the power to take it?
I don't believe that Jesus ever said " he that loses his life for my sake shall find it". Those are word put into his mouth by Christians facing Roman pogroms. Stirring yes. Authentic. No. Firstly, HWNN1961 it is your choice as to whether you believe the Gospels to be an authentic account or not. I have studied Higher and Lower Criticism and do not believe the case to dismiss their authenticity stands up. Yes, the Scripture in question doesn't sit well with some people, but that's precisely the point being made, as these quotes from Bible scholars indicate... Quote:John Wesley: He that finds his life shall lose it - He that saves his life by denying Jesus, shall lose it eternally; and he that loses his life by confessing me, shall save it eternally. And as you shall be thus rewarded, so in proportion shall they who entertain you for my sake.
People's New Testament Commentary: He that finds his life shall lose it. Whoever counts his life of so much value that he will preserve it by sacrificing his Christian integrity, or will renounce his religion to save his life, will find in the end that he has lost his soul forever for the sake of a few fleeting years; while he who gives up all things, even life itself, will find an abundant reward in the life eternal. All self-seeking is self-losing. The Divine law is always to give in order to receive.
Jamieson, Faussett, Brown: He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it — another of those pregnant sayings which our Lord so often reiterates (Mat_16:25; Luk_17:33; Joh_12:25). The pith of such paradoxical maxims depends on the double sense attached to the word “life” - a lower and a higher, the natural and the spiritual, the temporal and eternal. An entire sacrifice of the lower, with all its relationships and interests - or, a willingness to make it which is the same thing - is indispensable to the preservation of the higher life; and he who cannot bring himself to surrender the one for the sake of the other shall eventually lose both.
John Gill: He that finds his life shall lose it,.... That man that seeks to preserve his life, and the temporal enjoyments of it, by a sinful compliance with his friends and the world, and by a denial of Christ, or non-confession of him; if he is not, by the providence of God, deprived of the good things of life, and dies a shameful death, both which are sometimes the case of such persons; yet he is sure to lose the happy and eternal life of his soul and body, in the world to come: so that the present finding of life, or the possession of it, on such sinful terms, will in the issue prove an infinite and irreparable loss unto him. On the other hand, Christ observes,
he that loses his life for my sake, shall find it. That man that is willing to forego the present advantages of life, to suffer reproach and persecution, and lay down his life cheerfully for the sake of Christ and his Gospel, for the profession of his name, rather than drop, deny, conceal, or neglect any truth and ordinance of his, shall find his soul possessed of eternal life, as soon as separated from his body; and shall find his corporal life again, in the resurrection morn, to great advantage; and shall live with Christ in soul and body, in the utmost happiness, to all eternity. Percivalpecksniff: Thanks for the poem and your comments...we agree about this Scripture... CHANGING LANDSCAPES
The trees in the wind sway upon the hill, singing the tunes of young manhood still
The stile, as if a sculpture yet holds its ground, the river below repeats its sound
The lane wends its way along the same path; the gravestone sports its epitaph
The house by the quarry looks as it did, with the upstairs windows by Ivy hid.
All is the same or so it appears, yet something is missing from my happy years
People are gone who graced this scape, the folk who lived here and gave it shape
They are the ones who gave life to this place, and held me then in a warm embrace
The roadman who walked his well-trodden way, has now succumbed to the call of clay
His tools in the shed corner have had their say, and his vocation belongs to another day
The Roadman, the Butcher his wife and their shop, the tramp and his nemesis the local cop
The farmer the fat woman the widow and woodman, Mary Martin, Betty and dear old Stan
All lie in the still of a churchyard grave dead to the sounds from the building’s nave
A layer of landscape has now passed along with me alone left to sing its song
Soon the sun will set on my day, yet the river *continue to flow on its way * Should that be continues.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,005
Points: 1,912
Location: United Kingdom
|
Thanks for your comment Dreamy, but I believe continue' is correct... read again. On my 'day' not days... its 'way' not ways.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 2,370
Points: 7,185
Location: New Hampshire, United States
|
Dreamy wrote:Epiphileon wrote:I wasn't aware that there was a spiritual landscape developing one way or the other. Although I must admit that I have no idea what that is, try as I might I can't seem to come up with even the first anchor, of a conceptual formation to fit that term. What is it? I have used a metaphor to carry a meaning across. This is what metaphors are for. Physical landscapes have physical features, hills, plains, rivers, waterfalls, oceans, trees, sunlight, moonlight, starlight, shadows, buildings, roads etc. By inference we can describe non-physical aspects of reality in these terms. The Bible is full of metaphorical devices. Epiphileon:A physical landscape is a collection or view of physical features. A political landscape is a collection or view of political features. An economic landscape is a collection or view of economic features. An emotional landscape is a collection or view of emotional features, and a spiritual landscape is a collection or view of spiritual features.
Dreamy I am well acquainted with the definition and various uses of metaphor. I am also pretty familiar with the possible uses of the term "landscape", I have used it extensively at times in describing the space of consciousness. Unfortunately I did not take the time to completely consider what my problem was with the question. I would have no problem with a statement such as, "The spiritual landscape of TFD's Religion and Philosophy forum is diverse, with varied mountains of conviction, and chasms of doubt." Or something of that order describing an intangible; however the concept of the question goes well beyond description with the phrase, "is it developing wisely..."
(As I think about this more, it seems to me that perhaps there is a question you may have intended, that if worded differently, would not have spurred the knee jerk reaction in me, that caused my insufficiently considered, question.)
I must be more mindful of the vagaries of language, especially when I have taken a perceived offense that is not necessarily inherent in a question. Here are what I consider in retrospect, to be the reasons I erroneously jumped to the conclusion that I did not understand the question.
As you probably know I am a non-theist, in my experience this means to other people that I am by default non-spiritual, if this were the case then it would seem that I would be excluded from being able to render an opinion on the question.
This is a secular forum and although discussions of a spiritual nature may occur, it is not by design intended as a spiritual forum, and therefore, should not have a spiritual landscape imposed on it.
In being asked whether the, already considered erroneous, "spiritual landscape" is developing wisely or foolishly, there is of necessity some standard or ideal that it must be compared to, and once again if that standard or ideal were spiritual, it would exclude those members perceived to be non-spiritual.
So in retrospect, (always a subjective activity,) this is what explains what, appeared to be, my ignorance of the use of a metaphor. I would ask that you consider that there may be some validity to the above assumptions given the underlined portion of your reply to my initial question.A spiritual landscape may be well ordered, like a market garden with neat weed free rows of thoughts about the essence of life and its meaning, its philosophies and and its religions; or it may be a tangled jungle, a barren wasteland, a remote wilderness or a scorching desert, depending on the spirituality or otherwise of a person.
I wonder if the following question represents what you are curious about,
"Are the discussions in this forum being conducted logically, rationally, and with respect for the individuals involved?"
This questions I could render an opinion on, the original I find I still cannot.
Question authority, before it questions you. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/6/2010
Posts: 1,214
Points: 3,601
Location: United States
|
I think that in order to be to be true spiritually, it must also be manifest in the physical. Like Marie Curie gave her life in the pursuit of her husband's studies but she, is still remembered falls into the category of losing in order to gain. Caterpillars must cease their life to become butterflies. In the spiritual sense it is the antidote to selfishness. Everyone spends the days of their lives in one endeavor or another. And everyone will lose the life they have. You will not be able to save it. You can only decide what you will spend it on. If you only use it for material things, then when it is over you will have nothing. If you invest it in others, you will have a chance to live on forever.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 941
Points: 2,924
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:Thanks for your comment Dreamy, but I believe continue' is correct... read again. On my 'day' not days... its 'way' not ways. Yes, I see...yet the river (always does) continue to flow on its way...excellent "poetic turning", pp!
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 941
Points: 2,924
|
Epipileon wrote:I wonder if the following question represents what you are curious about,
"Are the discussions in this forum being conducted logically, rationally, and with respect for the individuals involved?"
This questions I could render an opinion on, the original I find I still cannot. I ponder and muse about the lack of spirituality in the world at times, Epiphileon.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
Epiphilion wrwote - "...A spiritual landscape may be well ordered, like a market garden with neat weed free rows of thoughts about the essence of life and its meaning, its philosophies and and its religions; or it may be a tangled jungle, a barren wasteland, a remote wilderness or a scorching desert, depending on the spirituality or otherwise of a person..."
I wonder which 'person' you mean. The gardener, or the viewer?
I wonder if the following question represents what you are curious about,
"Are the discussions in this forum being conducted logically, rationally, and with respect for the individuals involved?"
This questions I could render an opinion on, the original I find I still cannot.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
Oops! I would be interested to know your answer to the question as you have reconstructed it Epiphilion.
|
|
|
Guest |